Last week I was brainstorming with a bunch of educators about the best new directions to take our school. I suggested that every student should learn to code, or program computers, at our school. Some folks at the table were nodding in agreement, others seemed shocked at the notion. I was asked if I was serious. I was asked why every kid should be able to do something so advanced with computers. There were expressions of resentment if such a requirement would be made. Some doubted that it would be a valuable use of time.

As a former teacher of technology classes, I know how excited students get about coding, and how they really do learn about far more than just limited technology uses. They develop pattern awareness, logic, mathematics, problem solving, and creative skills. But these types of learning are difficult to express without examples to show.

I tried to justify my position by referring loosely to studies and experts, but I did not really convince any of the doubters. I think I need to work on my arguments, and this post is an attempt at providing some compelling arguments for coding. It is also a timely post, because in less than a week, the annual Hour of Code event will happen worldwide, with the goal of tens of millions of students spending at least one hour programming computers.

So here is some background information for doubters that coding is a realistic requirement for all students:

The UK has now put mandatory coding into the National Curriculum for all students starting at age 5.

An October 2014 study called Fast Forward 2030 examined the jobs market of the future and concluded that the ability to use computers to solve problems will be a critical skill. It also said that half of the jobs titles that exist today will not exist in 10 years! Times are changing!

"A growing proportion of jobs in the future will require creative intelligence, social intelligence and the ability to leverage artificial intelligence."

Check out those last three words. Coding is the way to leverage artificial intelligence. I honestly believe that someday soon the ability to code will be a critical skill that divides those who can leverage technology and those who will be at the mercy of technology.

The biggest challenge facing kids today is understanding who they are and who they want to be. Part of the problem is that too many of the role models that society offers them are morally bankrupt, interested in serving themselves more than others. The loudest voices are the ones with the money, and their self-interest and greed is obvious. These are not the voices our kids should be listening to. As educators, our goal should be to guide students in deciding which voices are worth listening to, while giving them a greater vision of who they can be now and in the future. Let's show them that what matters in life is the relationships we have and how we serve others with our talents and our time. Let's give them a growth mindset that instills a value for hard work, creativity, and the belief that there is hope for the future.

Too often, educators focus on empowerment of our youth, without little consideration for the development of character and the need for thoughtful discourse on right and wrong. Our postmodern society says there is no truth. Don't believe it. It's true that people are dying of hunger. It's true that peace is fragile. It's true that human trafficking is evil. It's true that no child should be abused. It's true that every human life is valuable. We talk of global citizenship, but that phrase is laden with underlying values such as peace, stewardship, service, hope, and responsibility. Are we being explicit enough about these values as we empower our students in ways no generation has been empowered before?

Last week I read an article on sexting, the practice of too many teenagers who send nude or nearly-nude photos of themselves to other teens via Instagram. The police involved were shocked at how pervasive the practice was. The students were shocked that the police were shocked at their "normal" behavior. We have given power with no guidance. We have allowed our children to believe that their bodies are objects to be shared with no consequence to their self-esteem, purpose, or future relationships. We owe them a perspective strikingly different to the one they get on the internet and advertising where sex sells everything. It's a real-life scenario of empowerment with not enough thought to guidance and protection, and kids are getting hurt.

I believe it is time for educators to acknowledge that our education systems need to reunite knowledge and skill development with a code of conduct built on values that will sustain and build healthy relationships between people. One way to do this is to ensure every student has meaningful relationships with caring and conscientious adults. Another is to give every student deeply satisfying experiences with service learning. Who is with me?

Engaged in a fascinating group discussion today led by Mark Wagner, PhD, at the Korea EdTechTeam GAFE Summit. The questions we tackled were all about the features of schools that make them "future ready." FutureReadySchools.org is just getting off the ground, but they have some powerful ideas about the mindset we need to get into to really prepare students for the future. The core requirements for future-readiness are:

Courageous LeadershipEmpowered TeachersStudent AgencyInspiring Spaces

and these are supported by Infrastructure and Software/Hardware.

We had a great conversation unpacking and sharing on the meanings and potential meanings of these components. I believe this is a movement to watch over the next months and years. Could be transformative for schools, and I'm especially encouraged that they are paying attention to international schools! Keep an eye on www.futurereadyschools.org

I'm at the South Korea EdTechTeam Summit this weekend, learning about creative and best practice uses of Google Apps for Education (GAFE). It's inspiring and humbling to be surrounded by educators on the cutting edge of technology use. Jennie Magiera presented on cool uses of Google Draw.

Younger kids might not have the tech skills to create websites, but they can learn to do a lot in Google Draw. They can learn to import pictures, draw pictures, organize ideas, write text, demonstrate thinking, comment, reflect, and collaborate. These are all skills we want to showcase in electronic portfolios. A teacher can quickly create a drawing space for each student, then embed that drawing space in a class Google Site. As students edit their drawings, the class Google Site becomes a dynamic collection of basic portfolios that can be shared via the Internet.

As educators, we know how important the learning process is, but many still focus on the end products. Tools like Google Draw and other Google Apps have a revision history that lets us look back in time and see the students' work at various stages of completion, even some of their mistakes. Such a tool lets us get into their thinking and working process and understand their learning, and maybe misconceptions, better.

Google Apps also allow commenting on various aspects of a document. Teachers can use this to provide feedback to students. But, perhaps a more powerful use to the comment box would be to have students use it to reflect on their own learning or to have students give feedback to each other.

These were just a few of the amazing ideas I picked up this weekend. For more information on these Summits, go to the EdTechTeam website.

One of the best things about finishing my doctorate is that no one is telling me what to read. It's great to have the freedom to choose my next book, or put something down that doesn't appeal. I have quite a backlog of literature that has piled up in my Kindle collection over the past few years!

Last week I started reading The Principal: Three Keys to Maximizing Impact by Michael Fullan (2014). Fullan argues that principals are required to do a lot of work that doesn't really result in the improvements to learning they hope for. Principals micromanage curriculum. Principals conduct numerous observations with pre- and post-observation meetings with each of their teachers each year. Principals apply pressure to teachers and students to raise test scores. These things may have small effects on learning, but other actions by principals can have much greater effect.

According to Fullan, principals will improve the teaching in their schools far more by fostering collaborative professional development than by employing arduous individual appraisal systems. Principals must develop professional capital within their faculties so that lots of the detailed work of instructional leadership can be shared with knowledgeable and skilled teacher leaders.

Delegation is one of those skills I need to develop further. Part of my hesitancy is a lack of trust that the person I delegate a job to will be able to do it well. This line of thinking makes it clear that before I delegate, I need to build trust and professional ability with my colleagues. Delegating an important task to someone ill-equipped to handle it is folly. As a school leader, I need to hire teachers with great capacities to learn with me and with their colleagues. Learning and collaboration need to be part of the job description for everyone in education. It is more important to hold teachers accountable to these tasks than it is to spend time evaluating lessons that may not be very representative of how a classroom really looks everyday.

I recently re-watched a TED talk by Daniel Pink on the science of motivation. He reported on numerous studies that show how extrinsic rewards do not increase results when tasks require cognitive engagement. For such tasks, people are better motivated by purpose, mastery, and autonomy.

Pink applied these ideas to high-tech software companies in his talk, but I immediately put the ideas in the education context. For teachers, these findings are nothing new. Teachers don't get into the profession or pursue positions of leadership for financial gain. They do it because they see a greater purpose in their actions as educators, because they are driven to improve their professional skills, and because, in the classroom, they have a lot of freedom to teach creatively. (Much as we would like to believe the best about teacher motivation, the autonomy granted by longer vacations surely plays a role as well, though perhaps not on a daily basis.)

Take away a teacher's sense of purpose, ability to strive toward professional mastery, or their autonomy in the classroom, and you will see an unmotivated, burnt-out teacher. Pink's model might seem a little shocking to those in the business world, but it is nothing more than a reminder to educators of what we have known all along about our work.

In spite of this, I don't think we always apply these ideas about motivation very well to our students. Pink explained that, when we want higher thinking skills to matter, using external punishment or incentive is counterproductive. The consequence of success or failure preoccupies the mind, limiting creativity. Our grading practices and high-stakes testing can seriously limit, if not paralyze, the ability of our students to solve problems. Instead, we should seek to empower students with the values of purpose, mastery, and autonomy. Figure this out, and our students will begin to surpass our standards.

In his TED talk, Pink seemed to place a high value on autonomy, giving it more time than purpose and mastery. Autonomy is important, but that perhaps it should come as a result of a student's grasp of purpose and demonstrated mastery. Younger students get their autonomy with creative play. Older students need to be given increasing autonomy with creative work. Often the lines of play and work are blurry, and perhaps this is when learning is the most exciting of all.

When is it OK to not know the answer? Historically, in education we have valued the "right" answer. Lately there has been a push toward valuing the process more than the answer with approaches to learning such as Singapore Math and other problem solving strategies, but the goal is still to arrive at an answer and move on to a new problem. I wonder, is it alright to not know the answer, to look for it earnestly, but to be OK if it is never found?

I think there are certain topics where uncertainty is really not tolerated very well. This often seems to come up when the sides of an argument are very polarized. Global Warming Believers vs. Global Warming Deniers, Democrats vs. Republicans, Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice, Gun-control vs. Gun-rights, Darwinism vs. Creationism, Seahawks fans vs. Broncos fans (at least before the big game)... On many of these issues I believe people choose their side on the basis of culture, not the facts. Yet people will cling to their position, whichever it is, with a blind faith that is not the result of careful thinking.

Don't get me wrong, I consider myself to be a person of faith. Faith defines who I am and I think on some topics there is no alternative but to take a position based on faith. Sometimes we cannot embrace life itself without faith in someone or something. If one does take a position based on faith, then that should be stated openly and it should not be overused. I think many people take positions on many topics without any attempt to employ reason.

I am also not saying that an extreme position on any polarizing argument is wrong. When I look at the list of arguments above, I actually do fall much closer to one polarized end of nearly all of the arguments. But I think such a position needs to be taken for the right reasons, and hopefully because one is interested in the truth or, at least, an honest appraisal based on what can be known.

Politics provide a great example. Too many people vote in elections the way they pick a sports team, instead of really understanding the platform of the candidate or party. Is it because their culture demands it? Is it because their education did not provide them with the ability to think critically? Is it because their need for instant gratification or entertainment has robbed them of the ability to wrestle with a question for more than five minutes?

There are big, serious questions out there. These questions are deserving of long study, of deep conversation, and the reservation of judgment. As an educator, I want students to realize that it is OK to have questions and leave them unanswered for a time, maybe a long time, maybe a lifetime. It is also important to realize that when others are polarized in their answers, that's the time to be most careful in choosing a position that we understand and can defend. Sometimes faith is necessary so we are not caught in a stalemate of not knowing, but faith should not be our universal problem solving approach. I think it is OK to admit what we do not know and then look for others who want to have an honest conversation.

One of the things I like most about photography is that chance to go back and relive a moment; to reflect, reconsider, and even, perhaps, notice something new about a scene or a situation that I never noticed before. Sometimes, it turns out that I, myself, have changed since the last time I looked at a photograph, and the change in me causes me to see a scene or subject differently.

I took the photo on the left several years ago in the highlands of southern Tanzania. The grandmother in the photo was taking care of her ten grandchildren (only three in the photo) because their parents were all dead of AIDS. It was a heart-wrenching story and I have always gotten emotional looking at the photo.

In July, 2012, my own daughter was born, and I think being her dad has given me new insight on this photo. The little girl in the front is not dressed for the muddy streets, for the cool highland climate, or for spending time on the dirt floor of her cramped home. She is dressed like a princess, or as close as her grandmother can manage. That's how her grandmother sees her; not as a grubby orphan, but as a princess who has potential, value, and dreams. In the past I always just felt pity when I looked at this photo. I never saw the grandmother's high regard for her granddaughter until I had my own daughter and felt the same about her.

As an educator, I don't often view the students I serve as royalty, but perhaps I should. All of them have immense value; even the grubby ones, the ones who won't do their homework, and the ones who bully others. I wonder what a difference it would make if every adult they encountered at school would treat them as if they were a prince or princess. How would that sort of respect change them?

I've been playing guitar for almost 30 years and, I have to admit, I'm pretty awful at it. Sure, I can bang out a few chords and lead a few choruses when there's no one else to lead singing at church. But I should be a lot better, considering how long I've been at it.

I have used plenty of excuses for my poor playing over the years. "I need a new guitar; this one has a warped neck and the frets buzz." "I just don't have the time to practice." "My fingers hurt!" "These strings are too old." But the truth is, every great guitar player dealt with all those problems and more. My real problem is determination and desire. The problem with my crummy guitar playing is me.We can't be good at everything, but we need to find something we have a knack for, take responsibility, and make it work. I feel called to be a school leader, but I know I have a lot to learn. I can't go through the next 30 years blaming teachers, parents, students, budgets, bosses, curriculums, laws, or politicians. If I am leading a school, then the success or failure of the school is on me. No excuses. Hard work, discomfort, complications, and crises are just part of the job. Every great school leader dealt with those problems and more. Finding that determination and desire to motivate myself is the key to leading others. My school can be a beautiful ballad or buzzing frets. It's up to me. "Great principals take responsibility for their own performance and for all aspects of their school." Whitaker, Todd (2011-11-01). What Great Principals Do Differently: 18 Things That Matter Most (Kindle Locations 644-645). Eye On Education. Kindle Edition.

Redemption is a powerful concept. It is about turning a bad situation around and making something good come out of it. It is about optimism, patience, and trust.

I believe educators have opportunities every day to teach students about redemption. How will we respond when a student fails a test, hurts another student, doesn't get a part in the play, or learns they will be moving at the end of the year?I work with students almost every week who have behavior issues at school. I have changed my view on student suspensions in serious disciplinary situations. I used to think suspensions were needed to separate wrongdoers from the herd, to punish, to send a message that serious mistakes get a serious response. I now look for opportunities to make suspensions more meaningful. I prefer in-school suspensions, and we make sure students spend time with our counselor, think reflectively, journal, and develop strategies for the future. We talk a lot about restoring relationships that have been hurt. Sometimes students will tell me after a disciplinary situation that their relationships with others are better than before. It's a beautiful thing when broken relationships get healed, especially as a result of a redeemed crisis.

In moments of crisis, I believe we are very teachable. Our lives can be changed in these moments - we might see only the bad and remain in despair, or we can see opportunity for growth. Kids don't often have the life experience needed to see how a difficult situation can be redeemed. Let's grab opportunities to help them redeem the tough scrapes they get into

It's ironic how some kids have a tendency to be either too honest or completely dishonest in their use of social media. They will post exactly how they feel about Person X or Topic Y or post risque pictures of themselves with seemingly no mental filter or forethought. Then they will create a new account with cunning calculation; hiding their age, name, or location so they can operate under the radar of their peers or parents.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is useful to be able to be someone else online. I used to update my photography website and for several years that was a big part of my online persona. Most of the people who I talked to everyday couldn't care less about the pictures I had just taken or my new interest in a particular camera, but there was a small audience of folks who enjoyed my posts and images. In recent years, that hobby has taken a back seat to parenthood, job, and a doctoral program. I've posted much more online about my doctoral work than photography - again a topic most people don't want to hear me talk about everyday. The Internet helps us find an appreciative audience that we can't always find in real life.

But there has to be a limit to how far we will alter our ego online. Sure, in an online role-playing game we can be whoever we want, but in social networking, I think we need to behave with a sense of morality like the one we live with in our face to face relationships.

There was a series of Ad Council PSAs that came out several years ago that asked, "If you wouldn't say it in person, why say it online?" I think this a critical point to reflect upon for adolescents. Most of them can reflect meaningfully and make wise choices if given the opportunity, but many never give it any thought, and embrace hurtful online behaviors. They hurt themselves and others and it is amazing how often, when it is brought to their attention, they say, "But that's not really who I am!"

Exactly.

Kids need guidance in navigating the balancing act of real life and online personas. Common Sense Media has great resources for getting kids to reflect on Internet safety.

They argue that there is a growing dissociation between schooling and learning, because many students find what they learn in school to be irrelevant, yet they throw themselves into learning on the Internet using tools like social networking and gaming while we, the educational experts, shake our heads. While we are arguing whether the Common Core is the best set of standards upon which to build a curriculum, our young people are out there building their own curricula, one learner at a time. We may fail them, not because they lack the desire to learn, but because we can't figure out how to make truly critical skills and knowledge seem as relevant as MineCraft.

Maybe for now, while we try to work out how to really transform our school systems, we need to simply give kids time at school to explore, rather than expecting them to do it all at home after their homework is done. I am inspired by the courage of teachers who are willing to give up control and allow concepts such as Genius Hour into the sacred timetable. Genius Hour is school time when students get to develop their own inquiry-based investigations and learn what they want to. It has begun to take hold in 6th grade at Seoul Foreign School, where I work. I walked through a classroom yesterday and observed students using Makey Makey boards to create novel computer interfaces, sculpting a giant virtual Neptune with a trident and a floating water globe in MineCraft, and developing a survey on pre-teen relationships. Those were just the three pairs of students I happened to talk to first.

It is an exciting time to be in education, but also a little scary to think about the technological power that now rests in the hands of children. Educators do have a role to play as the schooling and learning paradigms shift. I think a big part of it will be to provide some ethical guidance about the use of technology, if we can just figure that out for ourselves...

"Teaching is not effective without the appropriate use of ICT resources to achieve student learning outcomes." (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010)

The authors of the statement above feel that every teacher's mindset should include the idea in the quote above. I'm surrounded by great teachers who use ICT everyday, but I wonder if they believe that they would be ineffective without it. Veteran teachers might have the most problem with the statement... maybe it would seem to invalidate their teaching in the 1980s and 90s. Maybe teachers of some subjects - like music, art , or PE - would bristle at the notion that achievement requires technology.

They might be right. There is certainly a lot to be learned by turning the technology off. A good book, a pleasant conversation, or time to meditate in solitude can all offer important learning opportunities.

But I think it is important that we do embrace instructional technology as the new reality of teaching in the 21st century. Our students may dismiss us our teaching as irrelevant if technology is absent. Technology facilitates differentiation, collaboration, research, and reflective practice. Technology makes it easier for teachers to be student or learner-centered.

Every 21st century teacher needs to understand the important role of technology and use it when it fits. That is still the prerogative of the teacher: to use professional judgement and facilitate learning by guiding students in the effective and ethical use of powerful technology. And, we need to teach kids that sometimes the best choice is to turn it off.

“Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand.”

How is it that I just saw this Chinese proverb for the first time today? You'd think that someone who has been a student for 26 years and an educator for 16 years would have run across it. But no...

21st Century skills are not new to the 21st Century... well maybe the emphasis on ICT is... but the core of the "new" paradigm is being student-centered: differentiation, collaboration, inquiry. And here we have a Chinese proverb that summed it up ages ago. It reminds me of something C.S. Lewis said. "We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."

I think education is like that sometimes. We see returns to great teaching techniques of the past such as the Socratic Method and we are blown away by how much sense it makes for teaching critical thinking (another 21st Century skill.)

Do educational methods change because different times require different methods? Do methods change because we get bored with the old way? Most current educators shudder at the thought of rote memorization, as still practiced in many countries. How long will it be before we are memorizing again?